#yes this post is due to neil gaiman article

[canonicallysoulmates]

There's been too many cases of abusive men using BDSM as a way to gaslight their victims and excuse their abuse and I think one of the reasons why they get away with this so often is because, from what I have seen, they target women who are either new to the community or have no knowledge, or an erroneous idea, of what BDSM is and what healthy dom/sub dynamics are like so when they're confronted with their abuse they throw the BDSM card and take advantage of that lack of knowledge to get away with what they do. Which is why I know there's at least one person out there who needs to hear the following:

BDSM always involves consent.

You should be encouraged to share what you are into, what you aren't into, and what you're willing to try and if any of those things change. You can have boundaries and limitations. These can change.

A big part of BDSM is communication. If the person you're with makes you feel bad about this, or like you can't say that you don't like or don't want to try something they are not a dom, they are abusive.

Safewords and signals are things that should be discussed and their use encouraged. If the person you are with makes you feel bad about using your safeword or pausing the scene, they are not a dom, they are abusive.

You could have spent hours/days/months eagerly planning a scene that involves doing the kinkiest, freakiest things if at any point you change your mind you can revoke your consent. If the person, or people, you are having sex with doesn't stop that is not BDSM. That is abuse, that is rape, that is assault.

BECAUSE BDSM ALWAYS INVOLVES CONSENT.

And if a man who claims to be into BDSM and that they're a "dom" tries to tell you any different run in the opposite direction. They are not dominant, they are abusive.

[embracing-the-ineffable]

This is really thoughtful, thank you for sharing. For anyone who wants them, the full audio plus transcripts for all four episodes of the podcast are available to download here (for one more day before the link might expire), or you can read all four transcripts in your browser.

Also, I'm tagging my relevant posts (mostly reblogs) with #ineffable grief, and you can see all of them here.

OP also has a reaction post here which is worth thinking about. Quoted below:

"Regarding Neil Gaiman:

Neil Gaiman is not innocent. This is not a smear campaign. However the circumstances are so much more complex and nuanced than they appeared in the article. The headlines and article were misleading.

At best, he is an irresponsible BDSM partner who did not create a safe environment for these women, exploited his position of power/fame over them, and has at least two specific credible allegations of SA. At worse? Well, it's not good.

Did this rise to a criminal/prosecutable level? No. The police refused to take up the victims complaint due to lack of evidence and text messages of consent she sent. We can never know if it was true or false consent (and that obviously doesn't cover every circumstance), but there were messages of consent.

The fact of the matter is, yes he's a creep. He messed up. He made bad choices. Is he a monster? No. Is he a good person? Also no. He's just a man that we don't know, who made some terrible decisions and hurt people in his personal life. Beware of posts that will tell you he is either a irredeemable monster or completely innocent.

Regarding the Victims:

There is no such thing as a perfect victim and this is crucial in this case. These are two women who now feel traumatized by their relationship with Neil, and make no mistake, they are victims here. There is one undisputable instance of SA with K, and Scarlett's first encounter with Neil (assuming Scarlett's version is truth) was also SA. There is no getting around this fact. While age gaps are not inherently bad, these two, coupled with Neil's fame, created an environment that was harmful to them.

However, it is not true that they had no agency in this. They did make decisions, however understandable, that create a case that is complex and unclear. There are multiple times where they knowingly lied about consent during acts they did not actually want, and both verbalized it in writing and in their own words on the podcast. This does not negate their trauma about these events, and this not mean the consent in those moments was freely or unproblematically given, nor does it imply blanket consent. But in the end, consent was given at the time for some acts they now regret, and no concerns were voiced to Neil directly until after their relationships ended. (This is a separate point from the two specific SA allegations)

We do not need to blame them, condemn them, or dismiss them. But we also don't need to purify them and ignore the responsibility they had in how some of the situations played out. (Some not all)

Beware of people calling their allegations false because of revenge, as a political plot against Neil, or fame. And beware of people refusing to look critically at this at all. These are complex, hurt, scared women. I feel so deeply for them and understand their regret and pain on a personal level. But in my case, my hands weren't completely clean either, and it's not victim/self blaming to discuss this aspect.

Regarding Tortoise Media

It is important to discuss that this was reported on by a conservative publication with ties to TERF activists. This is an undisputable fact and does play into how this entire situation has been shaped.

Their political bias absolutely impacted the way this story was told, presented, and investigated. This is not a fully credible source. There are multiple times they refuse to ask follow up questions and leave things intentionally vague. They are not open about sources, haven't provided proof of any of their claims outside of the podcast, and consult extremely politically biased experts. I do not believe this story would have been run by another publication.

As I said in my write up post, the fact that they view BDSM as impossible to be consensual (and in their words criminal in the UK) has an impact when talking about a relationship that included BDSM. They view this aspect as inherently abusive no matter the context and it's part of their main allegation.

However you cannot use these facts to dismiss these allegations all together. Most of this was told by the victims themselves in their own words speaking on the podcast. The issues with the publication does not negate these allegations. It is another piece of the puzzle. Be critical of their presentation, as I absolutely believe they exploited and sensationalized this story, but that doesn't mean there is no truth at all to be found here. Be critical of ALL MEDIA"

I’ve listened to the neil gaiman podcast. Here is a recap of the allegations and trigger warning I will talk about it in detail. This is an incredibly complex situation, so take care of yourself

Scarlett, one of the victims, met Amanda Palmer (Neil’s ex wife) and became friends with her. Scarlett was out of work and started to do odd jobs for Amanda and eventually starts doing some babysitting/nannying for them. It sounds like she was already very close to Amanda at this point.

So far I’ve seen her kind of referred to as just an employee and while it is factually true, I don’t think it’s completely honest. She was very much a personal friend of Amanda’s first and clearly had many interactions with Amanda that were not strictly professional. What I’m saying is that the boundaries between employee and personal friend were blurred from the beginning. Though blame still falls on Amanda/Neil for mixing personal and professional boundaries and not on the victim. I just point it out to say all three were already acting inappropriately for an employer/employee relationship

The first night she meets Neil Gaiman, he alleges that he asked her if she wanted to take an outdoor bath (I’m assuming this is a hot tub) together. Her story is that she did not know he would join her in the bath. He was naked but she thought it might be “normal” because she was used to seeing Amanda naked often. He says that the shared bath was consensual. She says that he pressured her into giving him a handjob and when she said no, he said she was “missing out” and he masturbated in the tub with her and then penetrated her anally with his fingers. His account was that this instance was only consensual cuddling and making out. She is clearly uncomfortable during this scene and any consent that may have given does not seem genuine. She does end up messaging him that night, “Thank you for a lovely, lovely night. Wow. Kiss”

From there however, they continue to have sexual encounters involving some potentially extreme BDSM scenes. In WhatsApp messages she repeatedly consents/expresses a a desire for these encounters. She tells a friend the sex is “rough” and “amazing”. There are A LOT of messages with clear and enthusiastic consent and love for Neil.

One message from Scarlett read: "I am consumed by thoughts of you, the things you will do to me, I'm so hungry. What a terrible creature you've turned me into. I think you need to give me a huge spanking very soon. I'm fucking desperate for my master."

"I may be ill [covid] but I am lying here with my sick little mind wondering into terrible, filthy, dark places, and I want you to, if I'm lucky, occasionally instruct me with naughty things to do so that I can fill all this alone time imagining your cruelty. I'm sorry, I'm such a desperate and perverted and kinky sad little girl. What do they say? When you play with fire"

Neil’s replies are described as neutral, affectionate, brief, and non committal. At least via messages it seems like Scarlett was the one perusing sexual contact.

She goes on to describe one encounter as so painful she blacked out and he hadn’t noticed and had left to watch rehearsal tapes? And that she had been bleeding? This encounter was very unclear, violent seeming but hazy. It’s really unclear what happened to her. It sounds like it might have been painful anal sex. Potentially consensual in words, but she clearly was not taken care of. He alleges that he only ever penetrated her with his fingers.

At some point she tells a friend about these encounters and the friend points out the power imbalance and tells Amanda. Scarlett says to Neil in clear terms that everything was consensual and though it may have “crossed boundaries at the start” everything after was consensual.

EDIT FOR CONTEXT: the beginning of this conversation opens with Neil saying: "Honestly, when Amanda told me that you are telling people I'd raped you and were planning to Me Too me, I wanted to kill myself. But I'm getting through it a day at a time."

Scarlett: "Oh my god, Neil. I never said that. I have been deeply upset about it all because it's triggered things from my past and also for many reasons. I feel whiplash. But I am horrified by your message." [more messages inbetween] "I have never used the word rape. I am just so shocked. I honestly don't know what to say."

Neil: "It was very unstabilizing. I spent a week actively not killing myself, if you see what I mean."

Scarlett: "I feel like bawling my eyes out. I would never Me Too you. I don't where that came from, and I have told Amanda that even though it began questionably, eventually it was undoubtedly consensual and I enjoyed it. Heart is pounding too."

Neil: "Knowing that you would be prepared to say it's not true, it was consensual, he's not a monster, makes me a lot more grounded."

Scarlet: "It was consensual. How many times do I have to fucking tell everyone?"

It has to be said that Neil implying he considered suicide over this adds context to Scarlett’s messages of consent and how true those feelings were at the time. It was incredibly manipulative on his end.

Scarlett seems to go through some pretty traumatic life events outside of this situation and is hospitalized for suicidal thoughts (actions? unclear). Neil sends her messages of support, which she now in hindsight finds it was his way of pulling her back in. She asks Neil to pay her rent and Neil agrees to. Neil’s bookkeepers ask her to sign an NDA, not specifically about any allegations but just talking about his personal life overall. She admits to not reading the NDA.

EDIT 2: I believe the timeline of Scarlett’s hospitalization occurred before she messaged Neil and said their relation was consensual.

She does end up filing a police report in summer 2022 but receives rent payments until winter 2022 and drops contact with Neil completely Jan 2023. She says her view of their relationship changed after her hospitalization.

It is clear from this situation that Neil did act inappropriately but this is not a black and white situation overall. Their first encounter in the tub is very disturbing. The texts/relationship after are very complex and I’m not qualified to place judgement.

Now important point I want to make about this podcast and its reporting. These podcasters are vehemently against BDSM and they made it clear they don’t think BDSM can ever be consensual. I think critiquing this podcast itself is a discussion worth having. I find this podcast to be pretty biased in that sense. An “expert” they have on as a guest says, “the idea that you can consent to degradation is such a stupid idea. Only men can think this up.” I’m not saying that Neil engaged in BDSM with these women in a healthy or consensual way, however the podcasters make it clear that they don’t believe BDSM could ever be consensual and they consider these acts as blanket abuse in any situation.

The second victim K, did meet Neil at 18 however they had no sexual/romantic contact until she was 20. She says,"I never wanted any of the stuff he did to me, including the violent stuff, but I did consent to it." Neil says they were in a two year relationship that was completely consensual. He says that he has record of hundreds of emails between the two of them that never show any sign of distress. K began to become upset that Neil did not plan on leaving his marriage (open at the time I believe?) or ever make their relationship public. Unfortunately it does feel like K consented to things she didn’t necessarily want to keep Neil in her life.

She alleges that they did not use lube during sex and it was often painful for her. During one encounter she alleges she told him not to penetrate her due to a UTI and he did so anyway.

K and Neil have an argument that leads him to break the relationship. He leaves, and buys a plane ticket home. K buys a ticket on the same flight, follows him onto the plane and begs him not to end their relationship. Security ends up removing her from the plane. They continue to email from 2008-2022 pleasantly and flirtatiously.

The podcast reached out to other sexual partners of Neil’s and they did not have any stories of misbehavior.

Overall, this isn’t a clear cut situation. Neil clearly did take advantage of his celebrity and position of power and failed to protect these women. He was the instigator in all these relationships and he does seem to seek out younger more inexperienced partners. Partners who don’t seem to have the social/mental footing to consent properly. There are times where he clearly crossed boundaries and assaulted these women. The bath/hot tub and UTI instances were clearly not appropriate consensual acts.

But I think there’s a discussion worth having about intentionally lying about your consent. Hindsight and experience can certainly recontextualize everything and I understand why they may have consented in the moment. The pressures they were under etc. They clearly at times felt like they couldn’t say no in some ways. But they also both actively perused the relationship and admit to giving clear verbal consent often. I very very much feel for these women and I’m so sorry that they had such a negative experience.

I have no answers on any of this and it’s not my job or place to. I hope this recap provides more context and that everyone comes away knowing that this is not a black and white issue.

I also hope everyone does not tie their identity/enjoyment of good omens/his other works on this. We as fans are not responsible for the actions of others. Our engagement with Neil’s work is not an excusal or support of his actions. We are not responsible for what he has done in his personal life. If you end up seeing posts that imply you are somehow a bad person if you engage with his works now, that is not a healthy or good take.

Be critical, be open to the facts as they develop, find where your comfortability with engaging in his works is, and do not tell others how they have to feel/act about this situation.

Much love to you all as this situation unfolds

[mockingowlproductions]

Modern Day Album Burning: A Christian’s Response to Return to Order

Before meeting my husband, I had never heard of Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. Since we’ve gotten married, we’ve read some of the books and watched several films based on Pratchett and Gaiman’s work. We’re also huge fans of Doctor Who.

When Good Omens was officially announced by Amazon – not Netflix, sorry Return to Order – we were excited beyond belief. One of the most comical stories by the duo, starring two brilliant actors, there was nothing to do but wait in tingling anticipation for May 31.

We had every good intention of watching a single episode per day. Twelve hours after we remembered what day it was however, we had finished the series.

The mini-series lived up to its promise. David Tennant: Brilliant. Michael Sheen: Fantastic. Supporting cast: Splendid.

We watched the show with utter delight. We discussed theology and doctrine about the End Times for hours after each installment of the six-part series. We felt the depth of the questions surrounding afterlife, death, Tribulation, Armageddon, and more.

We laughed our tushies off at the many dazzling, ridiculous lines throughout the whole thing. And we were delighted to finally know of a good use for the Queen song, “I’m in Love with My Car.” Hats off to you, Mr. Gaiman.

Today, when I got home from a walk, my husband mentioned the news piece that an uber religious group was protesting and demanding that Netflix remove Good Omens from viewing.

“Uh, it’s on Amazon.”

“Yes.”

Needless to say, I laughed heartily and looked up the protest to see what the heck was going on with these people.

I quickly discovered a short article on the protest, which linked to the religious group’s page. On the page, I read their demands, which started off with stating that “Due to an oversight…” they had gotten the streaming service wrong.

If that wasn’t enough to stop their argument, they had more to offer.

“This series presents devils and Satanists as normal and even good…”

Is it bad that a piece of art presents Christians and non-Christians as humans with needs, fears, and hopes? Is it so strange to imply that people who don’t follow Jesus could be among the masses? Or even working for evil?

When we forget that those with different beliefs and convictions are just as human as we are, we run the risk of committing one of the greatest sins of all: not loving and respecting our neighbors as we are commanded to love and respect ourselves.

It’s possible that the people in this religious group have watched Good Omens but it feels as though they either didn’t see anything beyond a trailer or that they went into the film series with presuppositions that this show would be evil and ungodly.

The fact that they publicly demonstrated against Netflix for producing this series says a lot about their approach. A knee-jerk reaction for publicity is what this feels like, rather than an actual truth-seeking mission and call to be like Jesus.

As Christians – that is people who follow Jesus Christ of Nazareth – we are called to live a life that demonstrates mercy, grace, and love. Not judgment as though we are God. In fact, the book of Matthew in the Bible specifically talks about getting rid of the giant plank in your own eye before going after the speck of dust in your neighbor’s. Of course, this is about one Christian to another, not a Christian judging a non-Christian for acting like “the world.”

We cannot expect non-Christians to adhere to Christian standards. And truthfully, people who are outside of the Church are often the most insightful into the behavior of the Church. They happen to be our target audience. And if we’re not meeting the needs of those who need Jesus, then why does the Church as an institution exist?

What is the point of protesting? What is the point of petitions? What is the point of all this advocating if the end result isn’t practical service driven by the love and compassion of Jesus, demonstrated with humility?

One of the key things that Return to Order appears to miss is that Good Omens is intended as a satire and comedy. The writers have not demonstrated a background of Biblical theology and have not claimed that this is a theological look at the End Times. Instead, this is a work of fiction. A satirical work of fiction.

One of the main points Return to Order seems to have issues with is how both heaven and hell are portrayed as being led by groups that want to have war for the sake of war: “…an arbitrary struggle devoid of meaning and truth.” Which reflects the mindset of a number of Christian groups who seem to have forgotten about mercy. Good Omens’ point is that there are Christian and non-Christian groups arbitrarily fighting for the sake of fighting.

Fear mongering, a staple of the conservative church that I grew up in, is still alive and well. Petitions like this continue feeding a long line of B.S. to marginalized people who are sheltered and kept from religious and political freedom through sermons preached by folks with an agenda. These folks often tell abused women that they’re at fault for the abuse and insist children should be taught that they don’t deserve love.

This culture of argument and divisiveness completely ignores the fact that “True love drives out all fear.”

How is biased, angry rhetoric godly? How can fire and brimstone sermons that condemn the already forgiven be a righteous demonstration of love?

The perpetuation of endless conflict for the sake of pride and ‘being right’ isn’t what I consider Christianity at all. A work of fiction is a work of fiction. A good story is a good story. A demon hell-bent on stopping Satan while driving a car aflame blaring Queen on the radio is a damn good production.

This Christian’s interpretation of Good Omens is that it’s a great work of fiction worth enjoying as such. It’s not a theology textbook, and it doesn’t claim to examine orthodox Christianity. It’s a satire that pokes fun at the end result of well-intentioned religious extremists.

The best way for us to put away the sword of the “Culture war” is to watch, read, listen, and interact with pop-culture that isn’t just made by Christians for Christians. And when we engage with non-Christian materials, it’s imperative to employ critical thinking skills to recognize the middle ground where we can connect with people in conversation – which involves both listening and speaking.

Because, let’s be honest. When have you ever heard that an angry protest or knee-jerk petition was the reason a non-Christian found peace, love, and acceptance in Jesus Christ?

What does an angry mob with pitchforks and torches have to do with the love of God?

When Armageddon does happen, whether there’s Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, or Post-Trib celebration at who’s right, I want to look Jesus in the eyes and hear Him say, “You loved the people I love. Well done, good and faithful servant.” I don’t want to have Him shake his head at me for judging people for using satire and humor to express themselves and their struggle with reconciling the mission of Jesus with the life “Christians” today.

 -- -- --

Thank you, Neil Gaiman and the late and great Terry Pratchett for calling out the fallacies and foibles – and truth be told the hysterical nature that the Church is so often guilty of. Return to Order might not care much for you, Mr. Gaiman, but there’s always a place on our pew for you, anytime you want.

[nearmidnightannex]

American Gods’ ungodly chaos

Or, well, entirely godly, depending on your view of the old gods. Just with (presumably) less incest and murder.

'American Gods' Sidelines New Showrunner Amid Delays and Frustrations (Exclusive - hollywoodreporter.com) SEPTEMBER 12, 2018 6:45am PT by Lesley Goldberg, Maureen Ryan

Jesse Alexander, who took over Starz's American Gods in February after original showrunners Michael Green and Bryan Fuller were pushed out, has been sidelined, multiple sources tell The Hollywood Reporter.

Insiders say Alexander was asked to stop working on American Gods, an adaptation of a Neil Gaiman novel, about a month ago. The word "fired" was not used internally, and a representative for Alexander said that characterization was not accurate. But Alexander, an executive producer, is no longer working on the hyper-stylized drama as a writer or showrunner, and has been asked not to sit in on editing, be involved on set or participate in any other areas of production or postproduction. One source described Alexander's role as effectively "fired but not fired,” as he has been relegated to the sidelines on season two but has yet to be replaced. Sources note that Fremantle, the show's studio, would rather exile Alexander than endure the negative attention that would come with dismissing a second showrunner in two seasons.

Yeah, that whole thing about not enduring the negative attention ... does not precisely seem to be working.

So he hasn’t been “fired” ... but that’s essentially only because they seem to be paying Alexander not to work on their show.

[...]  Multiple sources cited ongoing friction between Starz and Fremantle, as well as efforts by author Gaiman to assert greater control over the drama, as the core sources of tension. Actors have been rewriting script pages, and Fremantle, which had hoped to trim the budget in the show's second season, is now spending frantically in order to simply finish the season. Due to all the issues that have bedeviled this saga of clashing deities, the second season of American Gods will not arrive until 2019 — two years after the first debuted to generally positive reviews.

If this show arrives before late fall 2019, it’s going to be a miracle of modern showmaking and post-production. As much as this show requires in the way of special effects and other things that happen after shooting is done, and now they’re doing pickups and reshoots (apparently quite major reshoots, as in almost all of two episodes), and they still don’t have a finale episode even written?

This also does not argue well for the show getting a third season. If Fremantle didn’t want the untoward publicity of trying to get a third showrunner in two seasons, just imagine how it will come across trying to get a fourth in three seasons. And given this level of confusion and chaos and unclear authority, who would want the job?

[...]  Insiders stress that Fremantle opted to go with Alexander because the studio believed they could have a level of control over him that they couldn't with Fuller and Green. Alexander is said to have also appealed to Gaiman because the scripts he oversaw would stick largely to the novel. The way that Fuller and Green built out and developed the world of American Gods in the first season was a source of irritation for Gaiman, insiders say....

... Oh, dear.

[...] The fact that Alexander was Gaiman's choice makes it all the more surprising that he was pushed aside before the second season ended.

That said, there were clashes over scripts from the day of the first table read. Sources note that season two scripts were often rewritten on the set, as many involved in the series wanted to honor the original vision and protect what they saw as important aspects of the characters and plot. After some actors, including star Ian McShane (Mr. Wednesday), began taking passes at improving dialogue, the production was forced to enlist co-star Orlando Jones (Mr. Nancy) as a writer on the series so a member of the WGA would be credited with writing instead of having actors violating guild rules. Others say some writers were coming to set with hand-written notebook pages — rewrites on scripts Alexander oversaw — amid "screaming matches" between the showrunner and McShane....

... Oh, dear. And also, oh, MY! Orlando Jones seems to be doing quite a lot there. (Also, has not mentioned word one about this on his Twitter; I wonder if he knew this story was going to break.) That said ... I wonder if this workaround is entirely within the rules?

Starz is also said to be unhappy with Alexander, who, according to several accounts, took Gods in a more conventional direction. Though Fremantle and Gaiman supported Alexander — at least until recently — the premium cable network, sources say, balked at that evolution, and wanted more of the atmospheric, hypnotic tone that Green and Fuller had created.

This seems to point to some systemic and major communications issues at the front end. You’d think that before Fremantle the producers hired someone to make a more conventional show, Starz the network that was buying (and thus largely paying for) the show would have made it clear exactly what they wanted. And having done so, the onus would then be on Fremantle to say, “You can’t get what you want for the per-show costs you’re willing to pay. Also, what you want is likely to cheese off Gaiman, since that sort of departure from source seems to have bothered him.” And none of that seems to have happened at the early stage, so now that it’s happening at the very late stage of not having a finale to film, it’s a crisis. (Starz is also complaining that the new episodes look cheap. About which Fremantle could justifiably say, “Yes? And? Your point being ... what, exactly? You wanted lower costs, you got lower costs. You also got cheaper looking product. These are not unrelated facts, people.” Mind, sayng that would be setting sail on the SS Suicidal Insanity, so.) (I would also note that taking that story in a more conventional and novel-aligned direction at this stage risks making Shadow even more passive and reactive than he was in season one, and it’s already a story issue.)

There’s more -- considerably more -- in the article itself.

Quite honestly, while I would not expect to see this show at all this season, it would sadly not surprise me if we simply never saw the show again at all. The conflicts between everyone involved are large enough that it seems like they can’t be resolved very easily. And if Starz doesn’t want what Fremantle is delivering ... where can they go?

[thenightling]

When fandom becomes... Just dumb...

A few months ago I said that the fandom for Neil Gaiman’s Sandman was probably the nicest, warmest, most inviting fandom I had ever become a part of.  And this is still true now.

I was also in the Lucifer TV series fandom.  The show is what made me finally decide to give Sandman a chance last June. (Better late than never!) 

Ever since the cancellation however I have seen the Lucifer fandom kind of deteriorating...

Before Lucifer was canceled, the dumbed thing I had seen in the Tumblr fandom was bearing the occasional “headcanon” that Lucifer and Chloe would one day rule Hell together as King and Queen and they would live happily ever after in this way.  I have tried to rebuff this, explaining why I don’t believe Lucifer would want to go back to ruling Hell and why someone like Chloe could never rule Hell, also using quotes from the shows star that it’s “the ultimate redemption story.”  this all indicated to me that there was no chance Lucifer would go back to Hell. But explaining this perspective earned responses of “They have a right to their opinion!”  Yes, and I have a right to disagree with that opinion and to counter it with my own.  Having a right to your opinion does not mean it cannot be disagreed with. “Right to my opinion!” is not a magical shield that protects you from the opinions of others.  I hate when people use that to shoot down or dismiss discourse.

Yes, you can have your own “headcanon” but I’m just explaining why I don’t think it really works with the canon as we know it.  And I have a right to feel that way as surely as you have a right to feel contrary.   

No one can tell you what you can or can’t imagine.  That is always your choice but I have a right to explain why I don’t share your vision.  I have a right to disagree with it and imagine things my own way.  That’s what right to opinion actually means, it doesn’t mean “I get to make anyone who doesn’t agree with me shut up forever.”  I get to disagree with you, you get to disagree with me. That’s freedom.

Ah, but that was the worst of it for a while.   Nothing too serious really.  But then... Then the show got canceled.  And I made the mistake of joining several “Save Lucifer” facebook groups. And... things got dumb quickly.

First there were / are people who literally reply to everything with #SaveLucifer and #PickupLucifer.  And they even write it on meme pictures... Because Somehow Twitter can read a picture you posted on Facebook now?   

Besides the general lack of understanding of how hashtags work there were a few people out-right discouraging mentioning the source material.  “I ignore any post that mentions the comic strip.”  If you try to explain the difference between a comic book and comic strip you’re told you’re “Butt hurt.”  One woman with utter authority decided to say “Show fans are not comic book fans and fans of the show would never read a comic book.”  Umm... Excuse me?

A few “Most people don’t know it’s a comic.  I only know because my kids told me.”  It’s in the opening credits of every, single episode.  Do you cover your eyes when the text is on the screen?  

Then there were the constant sharing of express(dot)co(dot)uk articles, no matter how many times you tell them they’re a clickbait tabloid.  Stories that distort simple things like Tom Ellis doing an interview with BBC News and twisting it into “Is BBC Entertainment buying Lucifer?”  The trusting of Express is still on-going.

One posted about how in the Lucifer comics he doesn’t even quit Hell.  I tried to break it to this person that they were reading the wrong comics and he most certainly does quit Hell.  They have to read Sandman first and then Lucifer’s solo comics by Mike Carey.  He quits Hell in Sandman.  Later They posted something similar (about how Lucifer doesn’t even quit Hell in the comics) a few days later.   When I, again, tried to tell them that they were reading the wrong comics, they replied with “Are you done trying to spoil the whole story?  I’m not reading replies because I don’t want spoilers.”  

What part of…

YOU ARE READING THE WRONG COMICS

Do they not accept?  If someone knows this person please break this to them.

One recent incident I had was trying very hard to explain to an “expert” that the two Lucifer bonus episodes are NOT leftovers from Season 2.  That the season 2 episodes held over for season 3 had aired much earlier in the season.  Though I had linked a Q and A with Dan’s actor (director of one of the episodes) and a recent question response I saw on Neil Gaiman’s Tumblr, also confirming that the filming had been relatively recent- this person insisted they had done their “Research” and was refusing to accept that they were confusing old, several-month-old stories about the season 2 hold over episodes, and the two bonus episodes actually filmed for season four. 

People like that had been confusing and misleading fans and even commenting on articles about the bonus episodes because they couldn’t grasp that episodes filmed in season 2 and used for season 3 are NOT the same episodes shown AFTER the season 3 finale. They were shown after the finale because they weren’t actually intended for season 3. 

Here’s the common sense thing:  Season 2 Lucifer was filmed in Canada.  You can spot the Hold-over season 2 episodes easily because they are still using the Canadian sets and passing Vancouver off as LA. Those bonus episodes are using the authentic LA sets.  It’s not that complicated.   

   It would be one thing if this was just one person but several people were making this mistake and or repeating the misinformation.  Claiming, with absolute certainty, that those bonus episodes were filmed back in season 2.  Despite the fact that those two bonus episodes were still being sound mixed only days before they aired and were always intended as “stand alone” episodes for season four.  That’s also why the show had ended on a cliff hanger. They had thought they were definitely getting a season four. 

This particular one argued fiercely, this on particular “researched” person, and tried to explain away why she wouldn’t click the links I’d provided and wouldn’t read my ‘essay long” replies “because (she) has a life”.  Yeah, it became “That” kind of an argument.  

And there was at least one comment of “I wish Morgan Freeman had voiced God and not some random British guy.”  (That had earned sixteen likes...)

Then there were those who insisted Fox was going to buy Roseanne, that they had proof Fox was buying Roseanne (Satire articles and random Twitter posts from strangers) and that Roseanne would replace Lucifer.   After that came the conspiracy theorists that “One Million Moms got it canceled.”  One Million Moms was protesting Lucifer before it even aired.  If they were successful it would not have had three seasons...

Then came those that posted screen grabs of the show now airing on Mondays at eight.  Saying ���This is what they replaced Lucifer with!”   Umm... I shouldn’t have to explain this to grown ups.  The season was over.  That means even if Lucifer had gotten a fourth season, that show currently in the timeslot, would be there.  That’s called a “Summer replacement” or “Summer filler.”  But again, it wasn’t just one or two people. It was lots and lots of people all saying things like “This is why I’ll never watch Fox again!”  “I can’t believe they think THIS will do better than Lucifer.”

One poor girl suggested that she would have liked it if Azrael dressed like a Goth girl like Death of The Endless only to get horrible responses of “lol I think Angels predate Goth.”  Yeah, and?  Angels predate Nightclubs, Armani suits, and Piano too.   And “No, I like her nice and sweet.” and “No, I like her nerdy.”  What exactly do they think Goth means?  Due to so much anti-Goth commenting the girl eventually deleted her post.  

Some of the weirder ones (that feel like they never watched the show) are people talking about how they’d happily go to Hell to be with Tom Ellis as The Devil.

And a few posts saying “I’d sell him my soul” with several agreements.  But in the comics and TV show he repeatedly says he does not buy souls.   You were told this IN the show.  He doesn’t like this sort of thing.  He’s all about free will, remember?

 In the two weeks I’ve been in these groups I’ve seen more obnoxious fanwank than nearly any other fandom I have ever been a part of.   I had never seen fandom so bad in such a concentrated way.     

But the last two days I’ve seen the worst of it...

First I witnessed one of the head writers ask William Shatner if he’d be willing to play God if the show comes back. (This happened on Twitter and then spread everywhere.)  This bothered me a little bit since I had just heard Neil Gaiman would be happy to return to voicing God.  Apparently Neil had even said “Just try and stop me.”  

 Now if it was another “Dad is possessing someone” story, sure. I could have accepted it but it still didn’t sit right for me.   And it was the comments that followed that really got under my skin.  “Yay!  I didn’t like Neil Gaiman as God anyway!” and “Good. Neil Gaiman sucked as God.”   Wow...  Such nice fans. so polite about the guy who created the thing they love. 

Neil Gaiman has stood behind SaveLucifer along with William Shatner.  And suppose this was a temporary “possession” thing (as I was starting to suspect it would have been) and Neil Gaiman was set to come back after that?  You think posting that he was awful is a good idea?  This should be common sense but  bashing the voice of the man who created the character is rude.   

I know she (the writer) was trying to rile up the fans at the exciting idea of William Shatner making a guest appearance but immediately after Neil Gaiman said he’d happily come back, and not giving context to how “Dad” would be Shatner caused problems in the fandom, not unity and cheering.  And weird, senseless, sudden insulting of the man who created the character.  I really don’t like that.

The writers have made some really horrible decisions in trying to manipulate fan reactions. That drawn out “Will Chloe ever learn the truth’ and then last minute cliffhanger come to mind.  Along with the whole “Will Chloe choose Pierce(Cain)?”  NO!   Of course she won’t pick Cain!  Tom Welling told everyone who interviewed him that the role was temporary.  Everyone knew it wouldn’t last. 

My experiences today though top the cake.

An anonymously created fan art is circulating of a fake season 4 poster.  “One Man.  Two faces.”  And it even says #SaveLucifer ON the poster but there are fans mistaking it as real.  It’s a fan art photoshop job not even of the tone of the first three season posters!  It literally says “#Savelucifer” on the poster!  It looks almost like a poster for a low budget horror movie.  But they are mistaking it as real.

And finally, there is mild- very slight- not taken too seriously, rumor that Neil Gaiman’s Sandman might finally be adapted.  I know what triggered this rumor.  It’s because Matthew Cable is going to be in the new Swamp Thing series for DC’s streaming service.  And today Matthew is more well known for his role in Sandman than Swamp Thing.       

And for the first time in my entire experience in the Lucifer fandom I saw true anti-Sandman comments.  Not anti comics (I was starting to get used to those even if they felt like 1950s level ignorance), but actual anti-Sandman. 

 “If they do Sandman but not Lucifer their streaming service is gonna fail!” and “Boycott Sandman!”  “It’s our Lucifer or no Lucifer!”  You don’t even know what’s IN Sandman!  You might even like it!  It’s not a competition.  The Sandman didn’t make Lucifer get canceled.    

They don’t even realize some of their favorite lines IN the Lucifer TV show are direct quotes from the Sandman comics that they are now bashing!

When the fans start bashing the character’s creator, and the source material I tend to lose interest.  It’s like when I saw that the director of Victor Frankenstein had said the Mary Shelley novel was “as dull as dishwater.”  Yeah, how’s that working out for you, pal? 

  At this point if Lucifer is saved I’m not sure I’m going to watch it.  

The facebook portion of the fandom is really rubbing me the wrong way.  And most are thirty-somethings acting like children or newbies to the Internet. 

 In closed (private) Facebook groups replying to posts with a nausea inducing chorus of #Savelucifer and #Pickuplucifer (and jpeg pictures of the hashtags as if that somehow works!) is not going to DO anything.  And many are literally replying to everything with those tags or adding it to every post and when people try to explain that is not how the hashtags work in a private group on Facebook they get angry and accuse the person of not actually wanting to save the show.  It’s demented.

I admit I was already a little bitter the third season of the show focussed on the “ships” too much and ridiculously stretched out the “Will Chloe ever find out the truth?” only to leave it on a cliffhanger, and the writing in season 3 felt inconsistent to me. - (Cain wants to be mortal and then after a very short conversation decides he wants to be immortal.  As if he never considered the pratfalls of being mortal in his thousands of years of life?  He “loves” Chloe but opens fire on her?  And don’t get me started on what they did to Mazikeen, or Trixie accidentally giving pot brownies to her elderly teacher until she couldn’t feel her legs.  And Maze “hilariously” - and treated like it’s no big deal- throwing male strippers into traffic...) -  but I was willing to fight to try to get the show a fourth season, in the hope that a fourth season could go back to the quality of the first two seasons.  However after all the stupidity, rudeness, and assholary I’ve witnessed in the last two weeks I don’t think it’s worth it.   I know none of them will read this as they seem allergic to “long” comments.  

I’m getting seriously burnt out on the behavior of too many Lucifer fans...

[bayisbetter]

RIP 2016 Retrospective Dance Mix: David Bowie, George Michael Prince and More

I didn’t want to celebrate 2016, nor was I excited to ring in 2017. The future looks bleak, and we lost so many greats. Especially the loss of David Bowie, which hit me harder than any celebrity death ever has, or likely ever will. So this year, instead of bringing you the best dance music of 2016, I’m offering up a retrospective dance mix comprised of musicians who died in 2016.

Honestly, I wasn’t all that hip to new music this year. I had David Bowie on repeat after his death in January, and with every unarmed black man shot by police, I put Louis Armstrong on repeat. It was a year for listening to Nina Simone and a lot more Louis Armstrong. With so many celebrity deaths, it felt like a year for looking back, not only to those who died, but to those living we might not be honoring because they have the nerve to keep breathing without releasing new albums.

If you’re looking for a retrospective mix, this one touches on most of the notable musical deaths of 2016. Download or stream it right here.

I think this tweeter put it best:

It is becoming increasingly obvious that David Bowie has established a better alternate universe and is populating it selectively one-by-one

— Miss Texas 1967 (@MsTexas1967) December 27, 2016

  NOTE: If you are throw this on at a party, make sure you stop it on the next to the last track. The final track is a Leonard Cohen song read as a poem. It’s not remotely dance-able, and it’s grim enough to suck the cheer out of any room. But I felt it was the right tone to wrap up 2016 (on that note, lots of posts coming up about American fascism).

http://ift.tt/2idGiOi

RIP 2016 Retrospective Dance Mix

(right-click, “save as” to download mp3)

Playlist of songs below.

RIP 2016: Retrospective Playlist of Artists Who Died in 2016

Prince – Let’s Go Crazy

Tribe Called Quest – Can I Kick It?

Wham! – Wake Me Up Before You Go Go

David Bowie – Modern Love

Prince – Seven

Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings – Natural Born Lover

George Michael – Freedom 90

Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings – This Land Is Your Land (Woody Guthrie cover)

George Michael – Faith

Leonard Cohen – Partisan (Melle Kuil deep house mix)

David Bowie – Young Americans (Impeach the President remix)

George Michael – Too Funky

Parliament – Flashlight

Prince – Kiss

Vanity 7 – Nasty Girl

Jefferson Airplane – White Rabbit (Fuzzion remix)

David Bowie vs Eric Prydz – Dunproofin’ (Let’s Dance)

Leonard Cohen – Everybody Knows (Tiger Tooth Rerub)

David Bowie – Space Oddity (Munk Machine remix)

Wham! – Everything She Wants (’97 version)

Leonard Cohen – You Want It Darker (Paul Kalkbrenner remix)

Leonard Cohen – Democracy (as a poem, Neil Gaiman with Amanda Palmer on piano)

Dance Along to RIP 2016 with Me

Staying home on New Year’s Eve was a big deal for me. I always go dancing, mostly because its’ the one day of the year I can rally my homebody pals into going out. Like David Bowie says in “Modern Love,” “I don’t want to go out, I want to stay in, get things done.” Since I’d been meaning to try out live-streaming, I decided to ring in the new year dancing to my retrospective playlist. It’s pretty silly, and yes, I’m three sheets to the wind in this video. But if you want some company, or if you just want to have a laugh, you can dance along with me.

This playlist is a little different than the one above. I made a second draft with a few artists I’d left out the first time (Phife Dawg of Tribe Called Quest, Signe Anderson of Jefferson Airplane and Vanity of Vanity 6). Also after the first song it stopped, so I started it anew from where we left off. I am hoping to upload a dancing video with the new edit over it, but LightWorks crashes whenever I open it so it seems unlikely.

Google flagged one of the Prince songs in the video for copyright, so that section is muted, and due to the other tracks, it forces the video to have commercials…I’m beginning to see why people prefer Vevo.

Watch it on Facebook to avoid ads, muted Prince.

Post Script: No Comments

Comments are turned off for this post because I’m moving the articles here from http://ift.tt/2idFdpN to futureisfiction.com, and I can only have spam protection on one or the other. Feel free to reach out to me on social media in the meantime.

via Gotta Hear This Music | Future Is Fiction Blog http://ift.tt/2igtk5H

[cryptodictation]

Everything we know about the finale of the series

It was discontinued, saved by the fans, continued by Netflix and finally endowed with an announced end: the series Lucifer has a turbulent history behind it. Season 5 of the Devil Lucifer Morningstar (Tom Ellis) should now be the last.

At this point, we will keep you up to date with the latest news about the finals, which will remain with Amazon Prime in Germany, as confusing as this may be due to the Netflix takeover. This article on your series Favorite devil among all Series devils we're constantly updating it so you can keep track of the most important news about Lucifer’s Season 5.

When does Lucifer Season 5 start on Amazon?

The fourth season Lucifer was one of the most popular in Germany Amazon Prime series 2019. An exact start date for 2020 is not yet known. Find out when and how to continue, is therefore within reach, but not yet precisely defined.

© Netflix

Lucifer, season 4: Chloe and Lucifer

After all, Lucifer's 5th season was made by the originally planned 10 episodes still around 6 additional episodes expanded to a total of 16 episodes in the final season. The finale will be longer than seasons 1 and 4, but shorter than seasons 2 and 3.

At the same time, the long season 5 will not be released all at once, but in two blocks: twice 8 episodes with a break in between, to be exact.

The worldwide Lucifer fans (short: Lucifans) should be happy about the expansion. The series was already able to break popularity records. According to surveys, it made it after the takeover by Netflix in the United States 7th place in the most popular Netflix series. As Binge darling rushed Lucifer

meanwhile even Game of Thrones from the throne.

Pictures, videos and hellish insights into the 5th season of Lucifer

The Start of production from Lucifer 's 5th season brought some insights from the cast and crew of the series, based on a comic by Neil Gaiman had arisen:

© Netflix

Lucifer: First picture for season 5

The plot: What is Lucifer's 5th season all about?

After this all changing finale of season 4 (Attention, spoiler), Lucifer returned in the form of a devil

home to hell and let Love Interest Chloe Decker (Lauren German) as emotional as the audience back. Would he return to earth?

This finale, which would have worked as both a final and a cliffhanger, left us with nothing less than 10 burning questions back to the further story of Lucifer. The Appearance of hell in season 5, when the devil has been in his element for a long time, it definitely belongs.

© Netflix

Lucifer in his full devil form

Whether introduced in season 4 great new characters would return, initially remained unclear, but the showrunners promised the 5th season “crazy and brilliant” close. The

Absolutely bare Lucifer exposure but will probably continue to exist – not a naked devil for Season 5.

In addition, small details of the plot seeped through, the below another broken heart in season 5 promised:

Season 5 Lucifer's cast: that's the cast

Hopefully Lucifer's 5th season without annoying guest stars the cast wished for Reunion with the big bad guy of season 1. So far, only the following actresses have been confirmed returnees.

© Fox

The main cast of Lucifer

Lucifer Morningstar (Tom Ellis), the devil

Chloe Decker (Lauren German), Policewoman and Lucifer's love interest

Dan Espinoza (Kevin Alejandro), Policeman and Chloe's ex-husband

Trixie Espinoza (Scarlett Estevez), Chloe and Dan’s daughter

Amenadiel (D.B. Woodside), Engel and thus Lucifer's brother

Mazikeen, called Maze (Lesley-Ann Brandt), Demon, bounty hunter and Lucifer's confidante

Linda Martin (Rachael Harris), Lucifer's psychotherapist and mother of Amenadiel's baby

Ella Lopez (Aimee Garcia), Forensic officer (forensic evidence) at the police It will also be a reunion with Tricia helper give, it is unclear whether she as the goddess and Lucifer's mother of the dead or in a new role returns.

God himself is also in Lucifer's 5th season. Newly occupied he became with the U.S. President from Series 24: Dennis Haysbert

Lucifer and the end after season 5

After season 4 there was one Lucifer extension almost inevitable. By many Season 4 as the best season praised: The takeover by Netflix was even considered the best thing that could happen to Lucifer, seen.

After renewed Fan petitions and Tricks to force a sequel finally became known in June 2019: Netflix extends Lucifer by a 5th season. At the same time, the streaming service announced in the same breath that the 5th would be the last season.

© Netflix

Lucifer, Chloe and Eva in season 4

Then the ran Fans again storm against the end. The Lucifer stars also had after the extension more seasons expected. Show runner Ildy Modrovich, however, showed up impartial – after all, everyone was especially grateful to have been extended at all. She finally let Lucifer lovers know that she was could stop fighting for season 6 – that would have no effect.

Say goodbye to Lucifer on Netflix (and Amazon) – or is season 6 coming?

Lucifer is one of many Series that say goodbye to 2020. main actor Tom Ellis said goodbye to Lucifer conceivably wistful. Meanwhile, Lauren German promised that best possible ending and urged us to finish the long-planned completion as Chance of a worthy end of the series to understand.

© Netflix

Lucifer (Tom Ellis) in season 4

The Hope for a spin-off series or a film has not yet completely extinguished. Maybe Lucifer could live on in the planned The Sandman series, because the omnipresent devil also appeared in this Neil Gaiman work.

One surprising cameo in another series Tom Ellis has become Crossover yes already crept, although the guest appearance beforehand vehemently denied had been.

In this respect, denying Lucifer's 6th season could prove to be a lie. Rumors of an extension finally condensed into concrete ones optimistic statements including the number of episodes that raised new hope, especially as information about Season 6 official talks leaked.

But no matter when and how it really comes to an end: The actors and fans will love the series that started at the US broadcaster Fox in 2015 and may soon end on Netflix (and in Germany on Amazon) in 2020.

will surely be remembered even after it ends.

Are you looking forward to the Lucifer ending in season 5 or are you not ready for it yet?

The post Everything we know about the finale of the series appeared first on Cryptodictation.

from WordPress https://cryptodictation.com/2020/03/26/everything-we-know-about-the-finale-of-the-series/